Danish and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Danish and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the chargesheet dated 10.09.2022 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 13.04.2023 and of the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.1094 of 2023 (State Vs. Nafees Ahmad and others) arising out of Case Crime No.436 of 2022, with liberty reserved to opposite party no.2 to seek recall of the order by a recall application.

Issue for consideration

Whether, on the basis of the compromise between the parties verified by the trial court on 16.09.2025, the chargesheet dated 10.09.2022, the cognizance/summoning order dated 13.04.2023 and the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.1094 of 2023 (State Vs. Nafees Ahmad and others), arising out of Case Crime No.436 of 2022, could be quashed.

Court's answer

On the basis of the compromise between the parties (verified by the trial court on 16.09.2025 and affirmed by counsel for both sides), the chargesheet dated 10.09.2022, the cognizance/summoning order dated 13.04.2023 and the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.1094 of 2023 (State Vs. Nafees Ahmad and others), arising out of Case Crime No.436 of 2022, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC, P.S. Baheri, District Bareilly, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Baheri, Bareilly, are hereby quashed.

Ratio / Principle

Guided by the settled-dispute jurisprudence of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 (three-Judge Bench, para 58: proceedings may be quashed on genuine settlement even where offences are not compoundable, since continuation would be an exercise in futility and securing the ends of justice is the ultimate guiding factor) and the civil-nature/special-facts approach of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692, the Court kept that position of law in mind and found that quashing on account of the verified compromise accorded with the law and the facts and circumstances of the case.

Key takeaways

The order was passed after hearing the contesting parties; as a safeguard, if opposite party no.2 subsequently feels duped or betrayed, he may seek recall of this order by filing a recall application explaining the reasons.obiter¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Court No.77), bench of Saurabh Srivastava, J., on 13.11.2025 allowed Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 30984 of 2025 (Danish And 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another) and quashed the chargesheet dated 10.09.2022 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 13.04.2023, together with the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.1094 of 2023 (State Vs. Nafees Ahmad and others), arising out of Case Crime No.436 of 2022 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC, P.S. Baheri, District Bareilly, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Baheri, Bareilly, on the basis of a compromise verified by the trial court on 16.09.2025 and confirmed by counsel for both sides. Acting on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 (para 58: proceedings may be quashed on genuine settlement even where offences are not compoundable, continuation otherwise being futile and securing the ends of justice being the guiding factor) and Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692] (civil-nature disputes quashable on special facts to encourage genuine settlement), the Court held quashing consistent with the position of law. A safeguard was retained: opposite party no.2, if aggrieved, may seek recall of the order through a recall application explaining his reasons.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 30984 of 2025

Danish And 5 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Girish Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Hari Om Shukla, G.A.

Court No. - 77

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard Mr. Girish Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for applicants and Mr. Hari Om Shukla, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA.

The present application has been filed to quash chargesheet dated 10.09.2022 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 13.04.2023 and entire criminal proceedings of Case No.1094 of 2023 (State Vs. Nafees Ahmad and others), arising out of Case Crime No.436 of 2022, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC, P.S. Baheri, District Bareilly, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Baheri, Bareilly, on the basis of compromise.

At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been verified by learned court concerned on dated 16.09.2025 which has been appended with this petition, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded by learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error if the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise.

A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 , has observed in para 58 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its

NA528 No. 30984 of 2025

2

opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.

In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties.

Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, chargesheet dated 10.09.2022 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 13.04.2023 and entire criminal proceedings of Case No.1094 of 2023 (State Vs. Nafees Ahmad and others), arising out of Case Crime No.436 of 2022, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC, P.S. Baheri, District Bareilly, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Baheri, Bareilly, are hereby quashed.

Accordingly, the present application stands allowed .

This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties. If at all, opposite party no. 2 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he may seek recall of this order by way of filing recall application explaining the reasons.

November 13, 2025

Vivek Kr.

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad